Newsgathering

October 08, 2010

I’m a huge fan of Miami Herald columnist Leonard Pitts, Jr. His op-ed column today in the Star-Telegram is a good example of why I admire his work.

As usual, Leonard writes about a compelling issue with impressive thoughtfulness and clarity that anyone can understand. Today, he’s venting about why “citizen journalism” isn’t journalism at all. What his view boils down to is an argument that deserves a standing ovation:

“You cannot be a journalist -– citizen or otherwise -– if credibility matters less than ideology.”

I can’t think of a simpler, more effective way to speak that truth.

Amplified by the Web’s awesome power and other new media, ideology and propagandists infest our society and culture at a toxic level, focusing destructive energies on divisiveness instead of dialogue. For instance, have you ever heard talk-show propagandist Sean Hannity tear into someone who challenges one of his views? Hannity tears them apart. So goes ideology's attack. It takes to a new level the impact of the lies, rumors and shuck 'n' jive that have plagued humankind since Day One.

“Every Tom, Dick and Harriet with a blog is a ‘citizen journalist,’” Leonard writes. Well, obviously, not all bloggers view themselves as journalists, but many do, and as I’ve read them, I’ve noted that rhetoric, not verified facts, fill their work. Yes, it's important to share thoughts and reaction. Just don't call that journalism.

There's an entire universe of good blogs that reflect informed work and are worth reading. Check here and find some guidance here. And there’s an excellent local blog -– Fortworthology.

It’s too bad that more “citizen journalists” can’t be authentic journalists digging for and reporting facts -- from pursuing government documentation with Freedom of Information requests to exposing the scandal of potholes. This country of ours needs all the real journalists it can get.

If you’re not a journalist but would like to be, go for it.

I’d suggest, though, that first you read the Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics. Might want to note that the preamble speaks of “enlightenment.” Facts and transparency (and good journalists), not mere opinions, provide the light for that state of being.

October 07, 2010

Heard some bittersweet news from Dallas just while ago: Mike Lee, the Star-Telegram’s excellent city hall reporter, is leaving soon to join Bloomberg’s Dallas bureau staff to cover the natural gas industry.

For the S-T, that’s a hard loss of deep, credible institutional knowledge and talent, but it’s a great career move for Mike. It speaks volumes about his talent and why he’s held in such high regard at the paper, at city hall and among readers. Mike’s potent work ethic and deep familiarity with Barnett Shale-related matters will fit well with Bloomberg’s stratospheric level of competitiveness, competence and expectations.

There’s no source for business news that bests Bloomberg, in my opinion. They've been around since 1981, but If you’re not familiar with them, take a look at their website and their about page.

I congratulate Mike and Bloomberg. I wish Mike happiness, prosperity and fulfillment on his new path. I’m sure Mike’s going to be just fine with not having to pull obit duty, a rotating S-T assignment among the short-staffed city desk’s team.

Who will fill Mike’s shoes at city hall? That's a demanding beat that needs to be covered by a passionate, persistent and savvy reporter.

There are excellent backups in Anna Tinsley and Aman Batheja, one of the sharpest and most unflappable political writers around. Perhaps one of them will shoulder the city hall beat temporarily if not permanently. Whoever it is, we wish them the best. I have no doubt that Mike’s boss at the S-T, veteran assistant managing editor John Gravois, will find a capable replacement. Lord knows there’s plenty of hungry talent out there in the debris left by newsroom cuts across the country over the past two years.

Here's something I'm sure is weighing on newsroom managers' minds: Whenever a newsroom loses someone of Mike’s stature, a dreaded domino effect can follow as other staffers are inspired to bail out for opportunities elsewhere.

All newsrooms are vulnerable to that even in these tough times. I certainly had to contend with the domino effect back in my newsroom management days. But I’d guess the S-T’s particularly vulnerable in light of increased duties staff must juggle and disquieting daily uncertainty over when another staff cut may occur. At the same time, current tight conditions in the newspaper job market may blunt the domino effect. Time will tell.

This much is for sure: Bloomberg’s getting one heck of a reporter. The Star-Telegram will find a strong one, too. With the City of Fort Worth struggling with so much -– from a budget-busting pension plan to a retiring city manager, mind-boggling infrastructure challenges, and a fed-up citizenry/electorate expecting solutions –- the Star-Telegram must pump all the strength it can into the city hall beat.

October 05, 2010

After a 43-year career in journalism (mainstream regional dailies in Dallas, Denver and elsewhere) and communications (stints with the Dallas Police Department and political public relations), I’ve been ruminating of late about PR-related experiences.

It’s my wife’s fault.

She’s an APR-certified, down-to-earth and very wise veteran public relations practitioner who, in my purely objective estimation (I kid you not, because professionalism rules both of us), could run any company’s communications department. I respect her mightily and the admirable recommendations she has for the Public Relations Society of America (PRSA) that she’s sharing with that organization, but that’s another story. Don't get me started.

As she has prepared those recommendations, I’ve overheard her anguish over everything from whether her ideas carry validity to the wording and processes involved in presenting them.

On my end, I’ve reflected about how I’ve encountered PR initiatives and practitioners over the years. None are (used to be “is” but no longer) innocent. With feigned self-humility and lavish hospitality, they played me and other newsroom staffers, some of whom reveled in the gifts and strokes that flowed from the ego-fertilizing PR cornucopia -- amazing thank-you gifts, product “samples” and, well, “arrangements” with their attractive colleagues.

Of course, the great newsroom ethics push that emerged prominently in the ’80s, spreading through the ’90s and into the 21st century, soured such practices to some degree. Nowadays, even a non-profit organization’s T-shirt promotion aimed at certain news departments (Features, for instance) will be sacked up and sent to a night shelter or some organization that provides clothing for the poor. Meals with PR reps are Dutch affairs. For ethical purity, no reporter should take a free meal from a practitioner or even at a civic club’s luncheon they’re covering. And no knowledgeable PR practitioner should dangle such temptations. But it happens. But it shouldn’t. But righteous ethics say, “No Freebies of Any Kind. They Compromise Your Credibility, Dear Journalist. They keell you! Eat, Drink and Revel at Your Risk.”

So I think back to my beginnings in the news business, back to the late ’60s when I began my career at my hometown newspaper, the Texarkana (Ark.-Tex.) Gazette. So many memories, but I remember in particular the Christmas holidays when the funeral homes would send their ambulance drivers and sometimes their funeral directors to our little street-level newsroom at night with gifts for us, the hard-working, barely paid news staffers.

And with what did the funeral homes ply us? Wonderful little aluminum calendar thingies that could be bent in just such a way as to clamp around our watch bands. We could have a year's worth of months-at-a-glance right there on our watch bands along with the funeral home's phone number.

Sometimes some of us would wonder: If we’re getting stuff this cool, what’s the publisher getting? What’s the ad department getting? What are the guys in the backshop getting other than drunk? I can only imagine the PR-focused gifts at such levels. Whatever they were, I doubt they outdid the gifts that flowed to sports staff at The Dallas Morning News.

As at the Gazette, I have fond (and humbling) holiday memories from my stint at The News. I recall times in 1970 when I observed cheery PR guys -- not PR womens -- dashing through the newsroom and laden with holidayish bags and boxes as they made a B-line to the sports department on the west end of the newsroom.

From my city desk vantage point near the center of the newsroom, I couldn’t tell what the heck they had for the sports guys, but that didn’t matter. Word got back to us. The sports guys got jugs of Johnnie Walker, Rolex watches and other expensive things. I can’t remember what all piled up over there, according to sources.

But we on the night city desk could not cast stones. We were also plied with PR gifts. Maybe they weren’t as elaborate as the freebies the sports guys got, but they got us past many a deadline in a merry fashion.

Every Thanksgiving and Christmas season, instead of Rolex watches and expensive scotch, we got a platter of SMU’s famous brownies and a turkey, the remains of which were stolen one year by a copy editor after the final edition shoved. I saw him do it. I had ambled to the south end of the third-floor (newsroom) hall to smoke a cigarette and stare out of the huge plate-glass window there when I looked down and saw that editor running through the parking lot with that huge, plattered turkey carcass. I watched him stuff it into the trunk of his car.

I’m not sure the turkey or the brownies scored any PR points, but they were received by editors and reporters with charitable joy.

Then there was the time around 1972 when I was working on a story related to a Dallas utility’s expensive farm operations. When I met with the head PR guy, a VP, I made the mistake of asking first, “Hey, who’s your secretary?”

Gawd, she was a beautiful long-haired brunette, single, blessed with a natural come-get-me smile and a refreshing air of decency, which, I will say to my certain condemnation, is not generally found among hard-edged, crusty newsroom women (thank God).

“What? Who is she?” the tailored, handsome VP whispered, leaning toward me. “Would you like to meet her?”

I had not matured beyond my East Texas yokel level. “Yes!” I said to the VP. And so it came to pass, on an evening not long thereafter, I was sitting in the secretary’s humble apartment living room in Oak Cliff, listening to her stories about growing up in Oklahoma and the Assembly of God church where women were extremely unlikely to be defiled. I didn’t see her again. Didn’t do that story, either. I was depressed. Tweeeeet! Victory for the utility.

But I learned some good lessons, e.g., always keep hormones in check, never get distracted from the assignment (do not ever test city editors’ patience), embrace sacrifice, hard-ass professionalism and skepticism. If you ever suspect you're being PR'd, you probably are. If you never suspect you're being PR'd, God help you.

I could go on with more anecdotes, but let’s pretend there are word limits in cyberspace.

Your turn.

What do you think of such PR practices from days of yore? Are they still going on (c’mon …)? How have PR ethics changed? What lessons have been learned? What sort of credibility can PR hope to develop?

Can credibility even be an issue in a craft that’s relies on selective truth? Is there really such a thing as a credible PR practitioner?

Who’s running the PR profession anyway? How do they impact the profession’s credibility? Is that “APR” just a fake credential? Why aren’t there more practitioners with that designation after their name? How many heads of PR agencies claim APR?

Isn’t “APR” in fact a useless string of letters? What are the issues/anecdotes that come to your mind? C’mon. Share. Madmen’s a true contemporary story, right?

May 11, 2010

The race to get news online invites editing lapses that lead to publication of raw to near-raw copy that can carry embarrassing error perhaps not in facts but in the writing. I'd suspect that's what happened in the following sentence from an online report yesterday about the deadly tornadoes that hit the Oklahoma City area:

"It's unknown how many tornadoes actually touched down in Grant County this afternoon, but Wakita Police Chief Dean Bellin saw about five rotating clouds combine as baseball-size hail plummeted the area."

See the questionable word? I suspect the writer meant "pummeled" instead of "plummeted." Still, it's admirable to see hustle in getting news to the public, even if its credibility arrives slightly dented.

December 10, 2009

A number of readers and colleagues keep asking what I think about a recent move at The Dallas Morning News that has 11 news department segments reporting to advertising managers instead of newsside managers. Most of us learned about this from Robert Wilonsky’s Dallas Observerblog that reported the decision and carried the Dec. 2 memo that was sent to staff from DMN Editor Bob Mong and senior vice president of sales Cyndy Carr. Plenty of reaction followed on the Web. Google and see.

Mong, to his credit, didn't shy away from questions. And Publisher Jim Moroney was pulled into the discussion as well.

My knee-jerk reaction was alarm. News sections reporting to advertising? That smacked of perverse whoring at its worst until I looked further into what’s going on. Except for the organizational chart, which gags me, I don’t see much that’s new. And I don't like the thought of ad people possibly celebrating the long-desired taking of part of "the revenue-reduction department" as, over the years, I've heard ad- and business-side people refer to news departments that aggressively and effectively serve the public interest, which is what they're supposed to be doing.

Collaboration between soft news departments and advertising departments has gone on for decades, and there are policies that support it. For instance, when was the last time you saw news of an airliner disaster on a page carrying an airline ad? When was the last time you saw an expose on red-lining in the real estate section?

Collaboration shows up often in the development of special sections. But at metro dailies like The News and elsewhere, editors generally have developed news content according to news value and not because some business had bought a huge chunk of advertising in a section. In a situation like that, the ad buy tended to be based on the fact that a story was planned on a trend, a product category or the advertiser or whatever, and the story was planned because editors knew it had news value. The story had news value because of readers’ real or potential interest in the topic and need to know. Professionalism in the reporting and presentation of the story ensured a credible piece. A newsy section filled with content like that ensured a product with high news value, which in turn created high advertising value -- a strong vehicle in which to advertise. Sounds to me like that’s what The News is going after. They know as most of us do that credible news value is the single most vital ingredient in creating fertile territory for advertising in any for-profit news product. Advertising revenue floats the boat but doesn't power it. That's the news department's job.

The only criticism I have of The News' step is the new organization. I don’t like editors reporting to advertising. That creates the perception of advertising running newsside, and that’s a perception that can poison credibility, which The News understands and is an issue the Mong and Carr address in their memo.

Advertising exudes a potent presence. If handled in a tasteless manner, it can project a destructive presence, especially in the minds of that half of readership that subscribe or buy a paper principally for its news content. What would parishioners think if, say, they walked in to mass and hanging up there above the altar was a big Drink Pepsi sign instead of a crucifix? And maybe they’d noticed the holy water font sporting a decal for Ozark water. Obviously, Pepsi and Ozark would never pull such a perverse stunt, because they respect lines that separate sacred and secular. In a for-profit news product (and don’t get me started on that), which to me is still a sacred thing, advertising obviously has its place but it should respect where it is and act accordingly. When advertising muscles in on news space, that’s crossing and disrespecting a line and asking for trouble. Perhaps you’ve noticed as I have those god-awful pages in the Star-Telegram where ads chop into news space like bullies bellying up to a reader’s face. Disgusting and as repulsive as an egotistical airhead at a party who impolitely disrupts personal conversation. But it’s salary-paying revenue, right?

I could go on and on about all this as many of us could without even scratching the surface. There are many other aspects of The News' step that are worth exploring. For instance, the ad managers to whom newsside will report have been retitled as "general managers." Did they get a raise? Any raises given to newsside staff who'll be reporting to them? Whatever. Enough said.

To reiterate my concern about The News’ step, I don’t like editors reporting to ad managers. Why not the other way around to avoid threats to credibility? Mong says he and editors reserve the right to step in and to refuse to cross lines that would jeopardize credibility. That's good, but that’s weird. They’re going to say “No” to their bosses in the ad department? What does that say about perceptions of those ad-side people's news judgment and ethics? Why have them as bosses in the first place? But maybe those ad bosses will learn something about journalism. Maybe content that results will be infused with journalistic professionalism and high-quality news value. We can hope. At least hard-news departments like the city desk, state desk, etc., don’t appear to be part of the plan. As Mong and Carr’s memo says: “To better align with our clients' needs, we will be organized around eleven business and content segments with similar marketing and consumer profiles including: sports, health/education, entertainment, travel/luxury, automotive, real estate, communications, preprints/grocery, recruitment, retail/finance, and SMB/Interactive.”

There are some hard-news categories in that lineup, but they all have consumer dimensions as well that lend themselves to softer but still newsworthy coverage. We’ll see whether writers in soft departments generate the coverage or whether the hard-news gladiators get called up for duty.